The Effect of Nitrogen Fertilization on Yield and Quality of Bell Peppers

The Effect of Nitrogen Fertilization on Yield and Quality

of Bell Peppers

Michelle Le Strange, UCCE Farm Advisor,

Tulare & Kings Counties

and

Marita Cantwell, Postharvest Extension Specialist,

UC Davis

This research is supported by the CA Pepper Commission and the CA Pepper Improvement Foundation.

Bell Peppers are grown for fresh and processing markets in CA. Some growers use poles and black plastic mulched beds with drip irrigation and

harvest several times per season …

Others grow without mulch or support for a once or twice over harvest.

Some growers still use furrow irrigation, but majority use subsurface drip irrigation and

apply liquid nitrogen fertilizer through the drip system.

GOALS and OBJECTIVES:

Evaluate effect of N applied through drip irrigation on:• Pepper yield and quality at harvest• Postharvest quality

Rationale:

Nitrogen Best Management Practices may need updating.

No study in recent years has studied the relationship between N fertilizer and pepper harvest and postharvest quality, when grown under drip irrigation.

Fertilizer FIELD STUDIES 2009 and 2010 San Joaquin Valley, Westside Fresno County, UC Research Center

Transplanted Bell Peppers at 9-10” spacing

5 Nitrogen Rates – Preplant 11-52-0 + CAN 17 through the drip

RCBD, Four 40-inch beds per plot x 60’row - Data collected from

middle 2 beds; 4 Replicates

METHODS

5 N Rates: lbs/A (CAN 17 applied thru drip)

75150225300375

Flexflo Peristaltic injection pumps

METHODS

METHODS

4 Beds per plot4 Reps (RCBD)

Methods & Measurements

2009Plant: Mar 25

Variety: Jupiter

Harvest:

July 21 (120 days)

MG and Red fruit

2010Plant: May 18

Variety: Baron

Harvest:

Aug 10 (81 days) MG fruit only

Aug 31 (110 days) MG and Red

BOTH YEARSPreplant soil test

Whole leaf tissue analysis

3 times / season

Whole plant biomass sample at harvest time only

MEASUREMENTS

15’ row x 1 40-inch bed

Destructive HarvestYIELD

Size GradesMaturity

Quality (culls, sunburn, BER)

MEASUREMENTS

Harvest #1 Mature Green Peppers sampled and analyzed in Postharvest Lab

High N Plot

Measurements: 2nd harvest: Mature Green & Red

Low N Plot

Postharvest Handling of Peppers:

• Minimum of 30 fruit/treatment x 4 replicates harvested

• Placed in plastic bags, bags put in plastic trays, then transported in an air-conditioned van to the Lab.

• Fruit held at 45 degrees, covered with plastic sheets to prevent weight loss

• Evaluations completed within 2 days of harvest.

PARAMETERS MEASURED: • Fruit wet weight• Dry weight • Color (external)• Wall Thickness• Firmness (3 ways) • Bruise susceptibility• Cracking susceptibility

Color measurement (Reflectance color meter)

REPORTING COLOR VALUES

Lightness or Darkness: L*

Saturation, Vividness: Chroma = (a*2 + b*2)1/2

Color: Hue = tan-1 (b*/a*)

Hue values 115-125 for green peppers

Hue values 30-40 for red peppers

Postharvest Evaluations

Firmness measurementsPostharvest Evaluations

Firmness using texture analyzer (control speed of compression)For peppers use 25mm flat disc as shown in photo and compress peppers 5mm

Report data as Force to compress; 1 Newton = 9.81 kg-force = 4.5 lb-force

N firmness

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Firm

ness

sco

re, 5

=har

d, 1

=sof

t

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

95% Confidence Band 95% Prediction Band

Firmness score vs N firmness (texture analyzer)

Subjective Firmness Assessment using Hand Compression is correlated to texture analyzer results

Firmness Class

Score

Approximate Force to

compress (N)

Hard >5 >30

Very firm 5 25

Firm 4 18

Moderately firm

3 12

Moderately soft

2 10

Soft 1 <10

Postharvest Evaluations

Bruise Damage

Stainless steel ball dropped through tubes onto peppers from 1, 2 or 3 feet

Assess damage immediately and after 5 days at 45°F using a subjective score of 1 to 5 where

1= no visible bruise, 2= slight, 3= moderate, 4= moderately severe and 5=severe.

Postharvest Evaluations

Cracking Susceptibility

Peppers dropped onto blossom end from heights of 1, 2 or 3 feet

Peppers scored for visible cracking at the blossom end.

Score 1= none, 2= slight, 3= moderate, 4= moderately

severe and 5= severe.

Postharvest Evaluations

Rings from equator for:Pericarp thickness

% dry weight

Dried ground sample can be usedfor sugars or other components

Postharvest Evaluations

Field Results - 2009

Field Expt Table 2: Effect of Nitrogen Rates on Pepper Leaf Tissue Samples and Plant Biomass

% Total N Biomass at Harvest (wet weights)

Whole Leaf Samples Average of 5 plants (lbs)

N lbs/A 5-Jun 24-Jun 17-Jul Total Plant Fruit Leaf/Stem

75 4.23 c 5.02 c 4.20 c 3.60 bc 2.63 bc 0.94 c

150 4.51 bc 5.55 b 4.68 b 3.92 abc 2.77 ab 1.12 bc

225 4.72 ab 5.63 b 5.21 a 4.50 a 3.15 a 1.34 a

300 4.94 a 5.85 ab 5.32 a 4.24 abc 2.88 ab 1.32 ab

375 4.94 a 6.01 a 5.60 a 3.45 c 2.25 c 1.15 abc

Pr>Treat 0.808 0.131 0.599 0.048 0.048 0.008

Pr>Block 0.007 0.001 0.001 0.006 0.002 0.193

CV% 5.3 4.2 5.2 12.2 14.2 11.6

LSD (0.05) 0.38 0.37 0.40 0.74 0.60 0.21

Field Results - 2009

Field ExptTable 3: Effect of N-Rates on Pepper Yield, Fruit Size, Maturity, Culls Bell Pepper Yield Tons/Acre Harvest date = July 23, 2009

N lbs/A Small Med Large X-L Culls Total Yield ALL Greens All Reds Mkt Yield*

75 1.8 3.0 5.8 4.7 5.1 a 19.7 5.6 9.1 12.8 c

150 1.4 5.5 6.7 5.0 4.0 ab 21.6 7.9 9.7 16.2 ab

225 1.1 4.2 7.7 6.2 2.4 c 21.3 8.0 11.0 17.9 a

300 1.4 5.4 5.9 4.9 2.9 bc 20.5 7.8 9.8 16.2 ab

375 1.4 3.9 6.7 6.1 3.3 bc 18.9 5.9 9.7 14.2 bc

Pr>Treat 0.472 0.132 0.343 0.329 0.013 0.579 0.153 0.478 0.090

Pr>Block 0.010 0.885 0.008 0.014 0.184 0.001 0.000 0.029 0.001 CV% 35.4 32.5 20.3 23.6 26.6 12.6 24.1 14.7 15.7

LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS 1.4 NS NS NS LSD (0.10)* 3.3 * Market Yield = Med, Large, X-L Fruit

Field Results - 2010

Field Expt Table 2: The Effect of Nitrogen Rates on Pepper Leaf Tissue Samples and Plant Biomass

% Total N Biomass at Harvest (wet weights)

Whole Leaf Samples Average of 5 plants (lbs)

N lbs/A July 16 Aug 5 Aug 26 Total Plant Fruit Leaf/Ste

m

75 6.2 6.0 5.4 18.3 10.6 7.0

150 6.4 6.0 5.7 18.5 10.4 7.8

225 6.0 6.2 5.9 17.9 10.0 7.6

300 6.4 6.4 5.7 17.2 9.3 7.6

375 6.3 6.1 5.8 20.0 11.8 7.8

Pr>Treat 0.55 0.88 0.98 0.74 0.47 0.91

Pr>Block 0.75 0.88 0.96 0.78 0.69 0.63

CV% 6.9 9.2 14.1 15.5 17.8 16.7

LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS

Field Results - 2010

Field Expt Table 3: Effect of N-Rates on Pepper Yield, Fruit Size, Maturity, Culls BOTH PICKS Bell Pepper Yield Tons/Acre Harvest date = August 10 & 31, 2010

N lbs/A SMALL MED LARGE X-L Culls Total Yield ALL Greens All Reds Mkt Yield*

75 1.6 4.6 9.2 1.5 4.4 26.2 16.9 4.9 21.8

150 1.0 2.9 10.5 2.7 3.4 25.9 17.2 5.3 22.5

225 1.3 4.1 10.0 2.1 3.4 26.4 17.5 5.6 23.1

300 1.8 4.1 8.6 3.0 4.0 27.3 17.5 5.9 23.4

375 1.7 4.9 9.6 2.1 3.0 27.0 18.2 5.3 23.6

Pr>Treat 0.62 0.18 0.79 0.84 0.50 0.22 0.99 0.77 0.95 Pr>Block 0.71 0.83 0.21 0.45 0.45 0.99 0.21 0.04 0.08 CV% 52.1 26.1 23.3 84.9 32.2 16.0 20.0 21.4 16.5

LSD (0.05) NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS

* Market Yield = Med, Large, X-L Fruit

Postharvest Results 2009

Postharvest Table 1. Pericarp thickness and % dry weight

Color stage

N

Lbs/A

dry weight

%

Pericarp thickness,

mm GREEN 75 7.81 4.74 150 7.88 4.45 225 7.80 4.73 300 7.71 4.52 375 7.55 4.63 RED 75 8.89 6.00 150 8.86 5.55 225 9.47 5.96 300 9.52 5.74 375 9.25 5.96

Ave Green 7.75 4.62 Ave Red 9.20 5.84 LSD.05 0.44 0.27

Postharvest Results 2009Postharvest Table 2. Fruit harvested at the Mature-Green stage.

N

Lbs/A

Fruit wt.

g

Firmness score

5=hard, 1=soft

Firmness measurement

N

Color,

Hue value 75 144.4 4.7 21.1 119.9 150 146.2 4.9 22.6 122.7 225 161.0 4.4 21.0 121.1 300 204.1 4.7 22.5 121.3 375 174.4 4.6 21.2 122.4

Average 166.0 4.7 21.7 121.5

LSD.05 14.4 0.2 ns 1.5

Postharvest Table 3. Fruit harvested at the Red stage.

N Lbs/A

Fruit wt.

g

Firmness score

5=hard, 1=soft

Firmness measurement

N

Color,

Hue value 75 177.2 3.4 13.4 36.9

150 198.6 4.1 17.1 37.0 225 194.1 3.8 16.0 35.1 300 163.4 4.2 16.4 35.7 375 209.8 3.7 14.4 34.3

Average 188.8 3.8 15.5 35.8

LSD.05 15.6 0.3 1.6 1.8

Postharvest Results 2010 (preliminary)

Table 1. 2010 Harvest 1 Mature Green peppers N treatment,

lbs Fruit wt.

g dry weight

% Pericarp

thickness, mm 75 150.8 7.11 4.83 150 153.3 6.55 4.84 225 158.4 6.68 5.01 300 165.6 6.59 4.87 375 163.9 6.80 5.14

Average 158.3 6.74 4.94

LSD.05 10.3 0.10 0.20 Table 2. 2010 Harvest 1 Mature Green peppers

N Lbs/A

Firmness score 5=hard, 1=soft

Firmness measurement, N

Color, Hue value

75 4.85 27.65 120.6 150 4.79 28.17 120.5 225 4.94 29.53 120.4 300 4.86 29.94 120.6 375 4.88 30.45 120.3

Average 4.87 29.11 120.5

LSD.05 0.12 ns ns

Postharvest Results 2010 (preliminary)

Table 3. 2010 Harvest 1 Mature Green peppers

N lbs/A

% weight loss

(5 days at 7.5°C)

Bruise Index

Crack Susceptibility

Index

75 1.08 2.79 4.46

150 1.08 2.79 4.42

225 1.07 2.65 4.46

300 1.08 2.56 4.27

375 1.04 2.77 4.62

Average 1.07 2.71 4.44

LSD.05 ns ns ns

This research is supported by the CA Pepper Commission and the CA Pepper Improvement Foundation.

This is a work in progress.

THANK YOU

Inconclusive Results:

MORE DATA Needed.

So where are we?